Recently, the Cincinnati Enquirer updated its website again after a total relaunch earlier this year. This update is not a new look, but new organization. The biggest complaints with the relaunch were the slowness of the site and the simple fact that you couldn't find anything. So, I've not noticed an increased loading speed, but is the reorg better? Can you read the paper online better? Or is it still a mess with no cohesiveness? I like the idea of a daily newspaper where you can determine a front page story. With the relaunch that concept was almost abandoned. The power of front page story is the one natural editorial choice a news outlet makes about straight up news.

The revised site now to me as more of front page editorial choice present. It is not tied to the daily, more akin to CNN.com style with the instant front page story lasting as long as the editors see fit. This is an improvement to the organization.

The problem is still the ever shrinking local content. The staff blogs are acting as the supplement to lack of local news, and I think the reporters are ham-strung with that. I don't know how blogging fulfills their job requirement, so it appears as if they are doing it largely on their own time.

Sunday, December 28, 2008

I'm a little late on this, but Uncle Woody's, the combination neighborhood/campus bar on Calhoun near Clifton (across the street from the UC College of Law) has reopened. Apparently, it did so in late November, under new ownership and management. I'd noted the bar's passing (which is joyfully short-lived) back in June.

Uncle Woody's will host a New Year's Eve Party. You can opt for one of two different cover charges: $25 gets you unlimited domestic beer, and $35 gets you unlimited well drinks, domestic beer, and food. But those prices require an RSVP; showing up without a reservation will cost you an extra ten bucks. Either way, the midnight champagne toast is included in your price.

And if you're the Facebook-type, you can join the Uncle Woody's group.

The return of Uncle Woody's is welcome news, at least for this UC law alum.

The Enquirer's Campbell's Scoop Blog is reporting that Kona Bistro in Oakley is closing its doors. It appears that their lease is up and they would have to commit to a new 5 year lease in order to keep the space. Business isn't good enough. I've enjoyed going there, but haven't been for a while. I generally had good meals and management was very supportive of the community. I will be sorry to see them close.

Monday, December 22, 2008

By now, of course, we all know that former Bearcat coach Andy Kennedy was arrested for assault Wednesday night/Thursday morning. The case is next set for a pretrial conference on January 16 before Judge Dwane Mallory. Let me be clear: I have no earthly idea whether Kennedy is guilty or innocent. And it doesn't seem worthwhile to have that debate in the comments. But the way Kennedy's case has been handled thus far illustrates that people in Hamilton County--and in America--get precisely the amount of justice they can afford.

How is Kennedy's case different? Well, first, the AP reported that his attorney entered a written plea of not guilty on his behalf on Thursday. That means that, procedurally speaking, Kennedy was a "sheriff's release." In other words, when CPD took him to the Justice Center, sheriff's deputies processed him and immediately released him without holding him to first appear before a judge.

While this is not unheard-of, it's at least a bit unusual. Kennedy is charged with a violent, first-degree misdemeanor. If news reports are accurate, the complaint is based not just on the alleged victim's statements, but also on a bystander's statements. Moreover, to my knowledge, Kennedy has no local address. He almost certainly, as of Thursday morning, intended to return to Mississippi. So being able to go home without posting bond (or at least signing an own-recognizance bond sheet) is outside the ordinary, given that the sheriff's office knew (or should have known) that Kennedy would relatively promptly leave the jurisdiction upon being released.

Next, the very fact that Kennedy already has counsel is unusual. If he were indigent, he likely would have sat in the holding cell in the first floor of the Justice Center until the 12:30 docket (when "City misdemeanors" are arraigned), and then would have been assigned counsel. Had an indigent, non-famous Kennedy been lucky enough to be released by the sheriff, he would have returned to the HCJC that afternoon, when he would have been told to go to the HamCo Public Defender's Office to "qualify" (financially) for counsel.

Finally, Kennedy has not just one attorney, but two. It's been reported that Kennedy has filed suit against two of the witnesses who have allegedly alleged he committed an assault. As an attorney, I'm fairly disgusted by the civil lawsuit that's been filed, as I suspect its chief purpose is to intimidate the witnesses into changing their stories or not coming to court. (Although in Kennedy's defense, the witnesses ought to quit talking to the media until the criminal case is concluded.) After all, when I decide whether to file a lawsuit on a client's behalf, one of the factors I must consider is collectibility: in other words, even if I win, can my client and I collect the judgment from the defendant? In the Kennedy case, what is the likelihood that a taxi cab driver and a valet have assets sufficient to satisfy a judgment?

For an indigent defendant, there's almost no chance a lawyer would file a defamation suit on his behalf prior to trial. There's almost no chance his attorney could get the Enquirer or the local TV stations to publish his stance on the case, thus permitting him to align a potential jury pool one way or the other. Typically, when the media reports on a case that comes through arraignment, the reporters don't even ask defense counsel for a comment; they report only what is in publicly available documents and what's said at the bond hearing.

Kennedy is free, he's well-represented, and he's got the media telling his tale for him. None of these things would be happening if he weren't a fairly wealthy semi-celebrity. I don't begrudge Kennedy the advantages he has (every defense attorney in private practice has clients who benefit from financial resouces that wealthier people have); I just question why we can't devise a system where more people get the same treatment.

Last week, the Cincinnati branch of the NAACP announced that it will seek to place on the 2009 ballot an initiative to bar the creation of a streetcar in Cincinnati. (Those of you who regularly follow this blog know that I'm only lukewarm to the idea. While originally opposed, I've come around to support streetcars, though I've still not drunk the Koolaid offered by those who claim that light rail is our only, best hope for revitalization.)

This post is most assuredly not about streetcars. Instead, it's about whether this is an appropriate way for City government to be run. Earlier this year, the NAACP successfully opposed the use of "red light cameras," adding an amendment to the City Charter that prohibits them. I voted against the measure--not because I think the cameras are a good idea (they're a terrible idea), but because I didn't (and don't) believe it's an appropriate issue for a city charter.

I'm still not sold 100 percent on streetcars, but I'm not even sure how the proposed Charter amendment will read: "Cincinnati shall never have light rail"? That doesn't make sense. It's particularly troubling that the streetcar plan (at least in its current iteration) doesn't involve a tax increase. So we're talking about amending the charter to prevent a specific expenditure by Council, not to head off a tax increase or alter the structure of our government.

So here's my question: is this the right way to run City government? How many decisions should be decided by referendum? And if we really like referenda, should we consider amending our charter (and perhaps the Revised Code--I'm not sure) so that we could enact an ordinance by referendum, rather than constantly changing the Charter with day-to-day issues like expenditures or red-light cameras, thus permitting the Charter to do what it should: deal almost explicitly with the structure of government?

Sunday, December 21, 2008

In a recent post on the City budget, I ended with a suggestion that Charterites are really just Democrats going by another name. After some thought and discussion with others, I've concluded I made two mistakes.

The first was making the remark at all: it turned the ensuing discussion from one on the merits of the City budget (which should have been useful and much more civil than some commenters permitted it to be) into one on the nature of the Charter Committee and its members. It was tangential, and I should have just left it out.

The second, though, was my sweeping characterization of Charterites. I stand by the assertion that as a whole, the Charter Committee is on the left or center-left of the political spectrum. But some individuals (including, perhaps, a current Council member) may lean more to the right. My error did not stem from a misunderstanding of what the individuals I mentioned advocate. (It should be noted, regardless of his pre-Council tendencies, that Charterite Chris Bortz ran on a platform that included streetcars (economic development in inner-city is traditionally a Dem issue) and environmentalism.)

Instead, I erred because I tend to employ a perhaps overly-broad definition of Democratic thought and an overly-narrow definition of Republican thought. I've generally rejected the GOP because of its stance on social issues (which tends, in turn, to influence its fiscal policies). So when I see leaders who are relatively close to the center who don't take Phil Burress-like positions on social issues, I tend to identify them as Democratic. That's probably wrong. It's also not a mistake I'd have made ten years ago, but living in Cincinnati for nearly a decade has conditioned me to move my own mindset to the right, changing my expectations for what is "liberal" or "conservative," "Democratic" or "Republican." So suggesting that all Charterites are Dems-in-hiding was not just wrong, it was silly and unneccessary.

Hey...when we here in the blogosphere make a mistake, we fix it, usually with a fresh post. And until I or Brian, Julie, or Jack post something new, this correction will sit at the top of the blog for all to see--not buried at the bottom of page 6 as it would be in the more traditional media.

Last week, I noted Amnesty International's report on taser use and its consequences. My suggestion (which was merely that we think deeply about this issue) had me branded a bleeding heart liberal. (Of course, my recent post on the budget has me branded a closet Republican, so I suppose I'm just a hopelessly confused moron.)

AI's report (available here) has garnered attention elsewhere in the local blogosphere; at the Beacon, Justin Jeffre discusses it. So let's discuss how tasers are used in Cincinnati. But before we do, let's establish a baseline: I'm not some crazy guy who hates the police. If anything, my work as a criminal defense attorney has instilled within me far more respect for the police--and the work they do--than prior to being involved in the criminal justice system. But it is certainly fair--and necessary--to discuss appropriate police tactics.

So first, let's talk about the taser itself. CPD supplies its officers with the X26 Taser. There are two ways this taser can be used. First, an officer use it to shoot two darts at a suspect, which remain connected to the taser via wires and which deliver an electric charge. Second, the taser can be used in "drive stun mode," which means that an officer pushes the taser itself against a suspect's body, pulling the trigger and directly delivering a shock (like a personal protection "stun gun"). Here's how CPD describes drive stun mode:

While operating the X26 Taser in the drive stun mode, the carotid/brachial, groin, and common peronial nerve are the preferred target areas of the body. A drive stun is described as pushing the X26 Taser aggressively against the subject’s body while pulling the trigger. This will deliver a shock to that area of the body. A drive stun is intended to gain compliance from actively resisting subjects, aggressive non-compliant subjects, violent or potentially violent subjects, and persons attempting to swallow evidence or contraband.

(For those interested, CPD's Procedure Manual is maintained online here. The use of force portion of the manual is here.)

My concern is whether CPD policy with regards to taser use is correct or preferable. CPD--like all police departments--mandates a "continuum of force." In other words, officers must consider which level of force is appropriate to a given situation. The CPD continuum, from the lowest level of force to the most, is as follows:

Officer presence

Verbal skills

X26 Taser/Chemical irritant

Escort techniques

Balance displacement

Hard hands (pressure points/strikes)

Monadnock Autolock batons

Pepperballs/beanbags/40mm foam (all "less-than-lethal")

Deadly force

So here's the question: is the taser really the equivalent of chemical irritant? Should it be this low on the continuum of force?

There are truly two sides to the issue. AI's report is one of a growing number of sources that suggest that tasers may be more likely to cause harm than police departments realize. Moreover, officers sometimes escalate too quickly to tasers: that is, they sometimes move from verbal commands quicker than they would if the taser or chemical irritant weren't available. Anecdotally, at least, there are many, many instances of officers using tasers in situations where the situation wouldn't yet mandate the officer use "hard hands" or other, more physical techniques. The recent, truly egregious (and fatal) use of a taser by an officer in New York on a mentally ill, non-compliant man on a ledge is an example (albeit not a typical one) of officers using a taser in a circumstance in which they wouldn't use other forms of physical force. And the studies produced by the taser manufacturers regarding risk of serious harm to a tased subject assume that the subject being tased is healthy. Criminal suspects are often far from healthy, having abused their bodies with drugs or simply due to living in poverty for a lengthy time.

On the other hand, from the perspective of law enforcement, the taser is an excellent intermediary between verbal commands and more direct physical interaction. Moreover, once an officer begins to lay hands on a suspect, the taser may no longer be an option, as the officer will have to disengage and create enough space to reach across his/her body to pull out the taser and deploy it. (You've probably noticed that the taser appears to be "backwards" in an officer's utility belt, on the side of the officer's non-dominant hand. This is intentional. CPD does not want officers to simultaneously pull their taser and their firearm. Instead, officers are expected to make a conscious decision; they thus use their dominant (gun) hand to use the taser; that's why it's backwards-facing in the belt.) So placing the taser higher on the continuum of force may make it not usable at all.

Finally, I am concerned that CPD policy permits an officer to tase a suspect who is attempting to swallow evidence (most often, crack!). I've not seen this method of obtaining evidence challenged in court, but there's a colorable argument that evidence obtained this way should be excluded as violating a defendant's due process rights.

I don't have the answers to these qustions. But in the wake of AI's comprehensive report, this is an issue that should be debated, both within the CPD and by our City Council.

Saturday, December 20, 2008

2. The Budget Is Substantively Flawed.So what's the big deal with an extra million dollars in spending? That's certainly a fair question, given that our governments routinely piss away millions at a time without the least bit of consternation. The problems are both real and symbolic.

The first budget (the one suported by seven members of Council) was balanced. It didn't require any money to be pulled from the City's "carryover surplus" (this is what the County calls a "rainy day" fund). It also didn't require the doubling of parking ticket fines.

The City is facing major economic hurdles over the next couple years. The first is the status of the City's retirement fund. It's underfunded. Chris Smitherman has been sounding the alarm bells on this for some time; while he may be a little over-alarmist on this issue, no one has seriously suggested that there's not a problem with the retirement fund.

The second problem is that Cincinnati will see a major revenue shortfall next year. For some reason, this hasn't garnered much attention, but the earnings tax--the tax on corporate profits inside the City--is necessarily going to be down, given the tough economic times. Because end-of-year numbers and collections aren't in, that hasn't caught up with the City yet. But it will. So a million-dollar spending spree is inherently irresponsible.

What's more, the choices the five-member budget majority made lack common sense. Their offices really need an extra five grand to operate? During budget negotiations, Councilmembers had agreed to go to represented (i.e. union) city employees to try to negotiate COLA increases out of contracts over the next year. But the budget passed gives a COLA raise to non-represented employees, so there's no chance that AFSCME would concede this.

Moreover, the final budget is based partially on an increase in parking ticket fines. That increase will not, in all likelihood, generate as much as Council has projected. The new fines are so prohibitively high that a number of factors will conspire to reduce the number of tickets written and fines collected. The tickets will have a greater deterrent effect (leading to fewer infractions). More people will contest their tickets. And fewer people will pay their tickets. Maybe there are sound policy reasons for high parking ticket fines, but those weren't the motive for the change; revenue was.

I was also critical of the forty thousand dollars budgeted to municipal gardens. Are the gardens a good thing? Yes, they are. But there are at least a half-dozen foundations who would find funds for this if a grant application were submitted. While this is a good government program in prosperous times, this isn't the sort of expenditure that should come from the City's rainy day fund--which we're certainly going to need at the end of next year.

Perhaps the worst part of this is that the leader of the Budget Coup d'Etat was John Cranley, who is essentially a lame duck, in that he's term-limited and cannot run in 2009. So Cranley just doesn't care about the budget problems that Council will face at the beginning of 2010. That's why all four dissenters are members likely to run for re-election. If the City had an extra million dollars to spend, perhaps it should have been spent shoring up the pension fund.

So when the City is laying off workers next Christmas, keep in mind that at least Councilmembers' personal staff got raises and neighborhoods got tulips. I'm sure that will make it worth it for those who lose their jobs.

Earlier this week, I posted briefly on the disastrous City Council budget and was criticized as "anti-intellectual." So let's see if some expanded remarks can make my problems clearer (and less dumb).

The Cincinnati budget is a magnificent error for two classes of reasons: procedural and substantive. Let's deal with each in turn.

1. The Budget Process Was Flawed.On Wednesday, City Council passed a budget by a 7-2 margin. Following that vote, suddenly an "amended" budget was offered, and passed by a 5-4 vote. The new budget contained an extra million dollars in spending.

If you're interested in how the budget was passed, it's worth your time to pull up the podcast of the 6:00 hour of Brian Thomas's Thursday radio show. Go to about 21:30, where Councilmember Leslie Ghiz calls in and discusses the shenanigans pulled by John Cranley and Laketa Cole. Apparently, Cole's personal Christmas plans conflict with the City's budget process, so (of course) City residents take a back seat while Cole goes on vacation. Nonetheless, she signed the motion to pass the original budget when she returned. But behind closed doors, a group of Councilmembers, led by Cole (who had objections she failed to previously disclose) and Cranley got together and made plans to introduce the final budget.

What all this meant was that seemingly endless budget discussions--that took place publicly, in Finance Committee meetings--meant nothing. Everything was actually decided behind closed doors. In an era when the public is clamoring for transparency in government, a majority of our Council shut out the public. Worst of all? The five-member majority that passed the final budget refused to allow debate about it. After some initial criticisms by Jeff Berding, Laketa Cole made a cloture motion. So the City budget for the next two years was passed without being vetted in the Finance Committee and without public debate.

It's a tough day for me when Alex Triantafilou lights up Democrats on his blog and I have nothing to say in response. (In fact, on Thursday, he and I wrote largely the same thing.) I suppose I could point out that the budget wasn't passed by "five Democrats" but by four Democrats and a Charterite, as Qualls, whatever her affiliation in the past, is on Council as a Charterite, not a Democrat. It's hollow criticism, since we all know Charterites are just Democrats who think it's easier to win in Hamilton County if they don't call themselves Democrats. And we should keep in mind that Jeff Berding and Chris Bortz (a Dem d/b/a a Charterite) opposed the budget boondoggle.

There is no good way to lose your job. It's a devastating experience, no matter how it happens. Our jobs are inextricably linked to our identities--to say nothing of faith in our own financial stability in the future.

Having said that, though, it's astonishing how badly Hamilton County has been handling the layoffs. People arrived at work yesterday to be told that it would be their last day. Vacate the building by noon, they were told.

For many weeks, the HamCo Commissioners have made it clear to department heads that layoffs would be necessary. Why was the decision made to keep specific employees in the dark about whether they were on the chopping block? Certainly, these employees--some of whom have served the county for decades--deserved to be treated with more dignity than this.

Perhaps Commissioner Pepper (whose presence on the blogosphere makes him the most accessible of the commissioners) can help us with the answer to this. Was this a policy handed down from the Administration? Or did individual department heads make their own decision? And either way, again: why do it this way?

One of the reasons Cincinnati has such a tremendous art scene is the simple fact that we have first rate musicians at the CSO and CCO who break new ground with collaborative projects like concert:nova. Tonight if you want to have a conversation that involves live music, video, and theatre into a single performance, then make your way to Christ Church Cathedral (318 E. Fourth St. Downtown)at 8PM and experience new interpretations on classic artistic pieces you will not see preformed in this combination anywhere else. For more details check out CityBeat's preview.

The show starts at 8PM at Christ Church Cathedral with a 9:30 reception to follow. Tickets are $20 or $10 for students and ETA members.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

I hope to have more to say about this (perhaps over the weekend), but wanted to post a quick note now. We need to seriously reconsider the use of tasers by the Cincinnati Police Department and their proper placement in the continuum of force.

Today, Amnesty International released perhaps the most comprehensive report to date on Taser use in the United States. Among AI's final recommendations is that Taser use should be "limited to those situations where . . . officers are faced with an imminent threat of death or serious (potentially life-threatening) injury which cannot be contained by less extreme options."

The new report should be required reading for every member of City Council and all CPD policy-makers.

The final budget passed by Cincinnati City Council makes me wonder why I'm a registered Democrat. John Cranley played backroom games with the budget and ultimately proved he's neither a trustworthy leader nor a good steward of the public fisc.

You can read the Enquirer's report on the budget passed here. I've had a fairly well-lathered froth worked up since I heard about today's shenanigans. The budget--which is balanced through a combination of raising parking ticket fines (which will likely generate far less revenue than Council thinks) and raiding the City's version of its "rainy day" fund--includes:

almost a half million dollars in non-negotiated cost-of-living increases;

Ten or fifteen years ago, this would have been a legitimate budget. But not today. Governments at all levels are getting leaner. And City Council decided on a last-minute spending spree. And they did in such a way as to completely eliminate transparency in the budget process. But that's the Cranley Method of Government.

Supporting the budget were Cranley, Crowley, Cole, Thomas, and Qualls. I won't vote for any of them (yes, I realize some are term-limited anyhow) in 2009. And as far as I'm concerned, Qualls's mayoral aspirations just jumped the shark.

A prediction: Council's short-sightedness today will place the City in a budget nightmare next year, with the newly-elected Council forced to make significant revisions to the second year of this two-year budget.

First, the Fountain Square Chipotle is now open during the same hours as are most of the Chipotle restaurants: 11 am until 10 pm, seven days per week. (When the restaurant opened, its closing time was 8:00, with plans to be open only on "special event" weekends.)

Second, the building that previously housed the troubled Phoenix Cafe (Walnut between Sixth and Seventh) has new life: it will host the Righteous Room, an upscale bar to be opened by the spring. The new bar will be owned by the same folks who own the Pavilion and aliveOne in Mt. Adams. (The building is owned by 3CDC.) Also planned are three condos in the space above the bar, priced at around $220,000.

Finally, Wah Mee (on Elm between Fourth and Fifth) will close by the end of the year. The owners cite the high rent as the reason for the closure. It's a tough location (in a basement, on a block without a lot of foot traffic). No word on a successor in that space (or in the space previously occupied by a florist at Elm and Fifth).

Monday, December 15, 2008

An Over-the-Rhine institution is closing its doors. Kaldi's has unfortunately run its course. I hope for something new to opening up in its place, eventually. I really hope Jeremy Thompson, Kaldi's owner, is able to open up a new place somewhere in the OTR/Downtown area.

Sunday, December 14, 2008

There's a group in town whose mission is "to help facilitate the sale of the Cincinnati Bengals and the creation of a massive stone labyrinth in Paul Brown Stadium." Called the "Cincinnati Labyrinth Project," it even has its own blog.

In the short-term, I suppose the construction of the labyrinth could be a public works project that would fit in nicely with President-elect Obama's proposed economy recovery package. In the long-run, though, how much are people willing to pay to wander around in circles? And what's wrong with Ohio's abundant corn mazes? The CLP is trying to take money out of Ohio's farmers' pockets!

I like having an NFL team in town, even if the Bengals have a winning record only once every quarter-century or so. So I'm against the proposal. I'm willing to change my mind, though, if the Project can promise to have a minotaur roaming the labyrinth. That would be cool.

And actually, with a labyrinth and a minotaur, we could get rid of City Council elections. Just send everyone in, and the first nine to the center and back are on Council. Everyone else is minotaur-food.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

The Enquirer's Politics Extra Blog lists the amounts spent in the 2008 HamCo races. Perhaps most surprising is the amounts raised and spent by Todd Portune and Greg Hartmann, who each ran without an "endorsed" opponent.

Greg Hartmann spent over $322,000 (on contributions of over $221,000) in his campaign against independent* candidate Chris Dole, who spent a little over $10,000 (on $2,500 in contributions). Todd Portune spent almost $243,000 (receiving contributions of over $146,000) to defeat unendorsed Republican Ed Rothenberg, who loaned his campaign $20,000 and received no contributions.

In the County Recorder race, Democrat Wayne Coates spent over $12,000 (on contributions of over $10,000) to defeat incumbent Republican Rebecca Groppe, who spent $over $133,000 (contributions of $108,000).

In the Clerk of Courts race, Republican Patricia Clancy spent $252,000 (contributions of over $190,000) to defeat Democrat Martha Good, who spent just under $33,000 (contributions of over $24,000).

In the County Treasurer's race, Republican incumbent Rob Goering spent over $42,000 (contributions of $27,000) to fend off Democratic challenger Steve Brinker, who spent a little over $12,000 after receiving just a little less than that in contributions.

Even the unopposed candidates got into the action. Republican Prosecutor Joe Deters raised no money, but spent over $47,000. Republican Sheriff Simon Leis raised $5,000 and spent $12,000. And Democratic Coroner O'Dell Owens raised over $25,000, but spent just over $1,000.

Fundraising plays too large a role in the American political process. I was disturbed by Obama's fundraising machine (he has singlehandedly destroyed the public financing system), and pay-to-play is all too common (see United States v. Blagojevich, as well as, on a much smaller, less criminal scale, this recent episode locally). I'm not sure what the solution is, or whether in a capitalist democracy, there is one.

---*Dole is a Democrat, but ran without the party's endorsement or nomination. He did not appear on the ballot as a Democratic candidate. Rothenberg, though unendorsed, appeared on the ballot as a Republican.

Each of the three HamCo Commissioners has offered his own adjustments to Administrator Pat Thompson's budget proposal. View them online: Pat DeWine, David Pepper, and Todd Portune. Of course, we here at the Cincinnati Blog have read the revised budgets so you don't have to. Here's a summary.

As you'll recall, the most controversial feature of Thompson's proposal is a $12.4 million reduction to the Sheriff's budget, which could require closing Queensgate and ending county-subsidized patrols in Green, Anderson, and Colerain townships. Commissioners are looking for ways to restore that money. The chart below indicates how each commissioner either reduces expenditures (shown by a minus) in other departments or increases revenues (shown by a plus):

The big difference on furloughs is because DeWine and Pepper propose furloughing only Commissioners' staff, while Portune wants to do it county-wide (the difference between DeWine and Pepper is that the former proposes a five-day furlough, the latter ten days). The two Dems think money can be raised by selling advertising space on County websites (see the Cook County Assessor's website for an example).

Apparently, the HamCo Treasurer has recently revised its revenue forecast for 2009 upwards by about a half-million dollars. The Dems want to use this estimate, while DeWine is apparently unconvinced.

DeWine offers a fairly commonsense approach to how the HCSO budget cuts should be admininstered: let Si Leis handle it. He is not just the "expert" in this field, he's an elected department chief. DeWine also proposes charging ALL of the townships for patrols, not just the three largest.

Portune proposes a bunch of revenue additions (not in the chart) that would require changes to state law. Frankly, they seem like more of a wish list than a budget proposal. I'm not sure what the "Medical Expense Reduction Plan" is, but it's probably Portunese for "screw county employees on health benefits for the third consecutive year." I'd love to see a more detailed explanation of how he gets to over a million and a half dollars in savings in utilities and supplies.

None of them get to 12 million dollars between additional cuts and new revenue. (All of the plans are probably more akin to rearranging the deck chairs than steering the Titanic to a new course.) But each would minimize the impact of cuts on public safety. DeWine's proposal would keep Queensgate open through March. Pepper and Portune want to make sure the regional HazMat unit gets $100,000 stripped away by Thompson, but both neither are able to save Queensgate. Portune "an acceptable level" of patrols in the townships.

I suspect some combination of Pepper's and DeWine's budget will be what we see enacted. Many of DeWine's cuts seem wise in the current atmosphere, but both DeWine and Pepper propose some fairly speculative revenue enhancers (for DeWine, it's the "pay-to-stay" inmate program; for Pepper, it's the advertising plan). DeWine is "lame duck" with little to lose (his upcoming term on the Common Pleas court is six years), so he may be able to lead the BOCC through some politically unpopular budget cuts that the Dems themselves could not initiate (sort of an "only Nixon could go to China" thing).

CityBeat's Kevin Osborne touches on the overall problem with the staffing cuts at the Enquire. Like it or not, we have only one major news gathering company in this town, the Enquirer. Local TV News stations do not gather much news, other than headlines and video. You don't get much fact and there is a void of in-depth reporting in television. What makes a real news outlet is its ability to get first run original copy on a huge variety of subjects. How is that done? You must have feet on the streets going places and asking questions. More and more we only have people working in their offices getting emails and making phone calls. Photographers will be eye witness to events, but that is about it. Sending people out for interviews? How often does that happen with a print reporter anymore? They are not given the choice. Editors don't even have the choice to let go look for news. News gathering for the Enquirer has become a passive activity. That is not just because of finances, it by design.

Fewer people doing more work is not going to produce wider or better coverage. We are seeing this first hand with the death of the Enquirer's arts coverage. You can't decimate your staff and expect comprehensive coverage. CityBeat right now, for a weekly publication, has more theatre and visual arts coverage, than the Enquirer. The Enquirer only wins in classical music, which is not a big area for CityBeat. For CityBeat, this is great news, they become the better source. I have to say for the arts and the for reading public it is really bad news. It is so valuable to have two (or more) full opinions on current local productions. With the cuts in staff at the Enquirer and the limiting of space in the paper for arts overall, there is a huge drop that hurts our society. Local News is going the way of the Independent Hardware Store. The Media Wal-marts are destroying all that is local, all in the name of profit. The media believe, with much evidence, that their target audience, suburban and exurban parents, don't leave their homes, so the only arts they care (or need to know about) are national stores, which is Entertainment most of the time, not art. It is movie and DVD releases. It is Oprah's bookclub picks. It is reaction to NY fashion. It is Seven Mary Three coming to town masquerading as music coverage.

Blogging and social networking websites are taking up some of the slack. Blogs are a but a mere firewall. Blogs are not able to provide a large enough news gathering source to make up for the shortfall. There is a market for local news, but the profit margin isn't something that is going to find any investors. Social Networks are not organized and lack focus. They are become a great way to get the word out about an event. They are still limited, but for some organizations they can reach 90% of their known audience. They don't allow a good means of expansion, however.

How as a society are we going to weather this? How do we adapt? How do we get credible news out to the public, the type news they need, not just the puff crap they are being fed?

How do we keep real journalism alive? I honestly don't know. Trust is a key element of journalism. Blogs and social networks are not great ways to build trust. Institutions are how your build credible trust that last beyond one person running a blog. We can't rely on individuals to be there all the time. We need organizations that can have credibility beyond one person's reputation. I don't know where this trust will come from. As a blogger, I will keep on looking for ways for my blog to at least be more than just me. That is not easy, so lets all keep on looking for more ways to keep news alive.

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

I have to admit: I miss the old Alex Triantafilou--the thoughtful judge who really wanted to get things right. (You may recall that I lamented his decision to leave the bench.) Judge Triantafilou has been replaced by Chairman Alex, a party leader often offering nothing but soundbites, particularly since his side lost the presidential election. He's begun what he's promised will be "occasional" feature on his blog called "Democrat Money Burn." (Alex, of course, needs a grammar lesson. "Democrat" is a noun. "Democratic" is the adjectival form of that noun. The party of the president-elect is the Democratic Party. Alex cannot change the English language just because its suits him.)

To his credit, Alex is batting .500 on his first two "Money Burn" installments. In the first, he questions whether Mayor Mallory needs another staffmember. Griff (who just won't admit he's a Democrat at heart) has also raised that concern, and I joined him in the comments. In fact, I'd go a step farther: not only should Mallory not be given additional personnel funds, but the cost of his personal security (a CPD specialist on special detail) should be moved from the CPD budget to the Mayor's Office budget--and the Mayor's Office overall budget should not be increased. Alex will find widespread support for his relatively non-controversial observations with respect to Mayor Mallory's budget proprosal.

But he misses the mark in his second "Money Burn" post, in which he criticizes the HamCo Commissioners (really, though, just Administrator Patrick Thompson, since the only budget proposal thus far released is his) for failing to decrease the budget for "County personnel," a decision Thompson justifies by pointing to the need for increased "HR" (human resources) oversight during the massive layoffs to be undertaken in the coming months. Alex writes:

Really? We need to spend more on HR staff so that the county can moreeffectively fire police officers? Are these our priorities?

As Alex knows, police officers aren't the only ones losing their jobs. And the reality is, laying people off is difficult. Employers have responsibilities towards former employers (most notably under COBRA). Moreover, HR-savvy people should be involved with layoff decisions to ensure that they are undertaken in such a way as to minimize the potential for litigation. If the county is to go through the next few months without the service of people knowledgable in human resources (which over the past two decades has become a highly specialized field), the taxpayers may as well write a check for a half million dollars or more to the Cincinnati Employment Lawyers Association (the plaintiffs' employment bar). A Republican policy-maker's decision to expose the county to massive lawsuits is one of the things that brought us this budget nightmare.

So while we need to make sure we're pinching every penny (at both the City and County levels), we need to make sure that we don't make short-term cuts that will cost us dearly in the long-run.

City Council is currently considering hiring some of the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office deputies that are being laid off due to HamCo budget cuts. (The Enquirer notes this development towards the end of this article.) It's an excellent idea. Those deputies, in many instances, would be ready to hit the streets pretty rapidly. But Council should take heed of the following:

Cincinnati PD currently has a "recruit class" nearly finished with its Academy training. (The bright, shiny almost-officers were touring the courthouse today.) HCSO deputies should not be hired in lieu of these people, for two reasons. First, the City has already spent considerable funds in training this recruit class; discarding them is throwing that money away. Second, when the City takes on a recruit class, it makes an implicit commitment that jobs await those who successfully complete their training. Yes, sudden budgetary concerns could justify failing to hire a recruit class, but it would be less-than-honorable for the City to abandon its own recruits in favor of HCSO deputies.

Many of the laid-off deputies will be corrections officers, not patrol officers. The City needs to make sure that these officers receive whatever additional training is needed (likely something well short of Academy graduation) to make these officers street-ready. There's a big difference between guarding Queensgate and patrolling a neighborhood (and residents generally don't like being treated as inmates.)

The City should make sure that hiring laid-off deputies is at least cost-neutral with regards to, if not less expensive than, bringing in a new recruit class (again, after the current class has been hired). The City should save money due to the decreased amount of training these new officers would need, compared with a fresh recruit. But (and I don't know the answer to this) because some of these soon-to-be-former deputies would come in with considerable experience, the CBA with the FOP might call for them to receive higher pay. If the City is to hire these deputies, individual exceptions to the CBA should be negotiated to make sure the City isn't breaking its own budget.

Assuming these (relatively minor) concerns can be addressed, hiring HCSO deputies to be City police officers is a commonsense solution that benefits everyone. And it should be noted: as a group, HCSO deputies tend to be among the most professional (and physically fit) law enforcement officers in our community.

Monday, December 08, 2008

In doing some research on the appropriate geographical reach of jury pools in municipal court cases, I came across Ohio Revised Code 1901.25, which requires that when a misdemeanor case arises under a municipal ordinance and proceeds to jury trial, the juror fees are to be paid by the relevant municipality. (Most criminal cases--particularly those tried to a jury--allege a violation of Ohio Revised Code rather than municipal ordinance.)

The obvious example is jury trials involving Cincinnati's marijuana law. But any case transferred from a mayor's court to municipal court would fit this description (unless the municipal prosecutor amends the charge to allege violation of the Revised Code). I tried one such case (successfully!), involving an alleged assault that took place in Norwood, last year. The police charged the offense under Norwood's municipal code. We filed a jury demand, which has the effect of automatically transferring the case from Mayor's Court to Municipal Court. For those wondering, the HamCo Prosecutor does not proceed on these cases: instead, the local municipality will have a law director that comes to Muni Court and tries the case. (Cincinnati, of course, has several full-time prosecutors that prosecute all misdemeanor offenses that are alleged to have taken place within City limits, regardless of whether the complaint alleges a violation of municipal or state law. And in some instances, a HamCo Assistant Prosecutor is the elected Law Director of a particular municipality.)

Obviously, this doesn't involve a ton of money, but we're at the point where every little bit counts. Does anyone know whether our court is recovering these fees from municipalities (including the City of Cincinnati) in appropriate cases? I couldn't find the answer online anywhere.

Sunday, December 07, 2008

Check out my review at TheConveyor of the Falcon Theatre's production of "It's a Wonderful Life: A Live Radio Drama". I was privileged to attend the show last Thursday thanks to the kind invite from Julie, part of the Cincinnati Blog team. Thank You Julie! Check out her other blog too!

Saturday, December 06, 2008

I awoke this morning to a wondrous sight: snow! I walked home from Grammer's last night well after 1 AM and it was cold, but not snowing. To awake to a surprise of snow is an uplift. It allows for a little bit of youth to return when the flakes fall on your face. It puts you in the mood for the holiday. I've not been ice skating on the square yet, but it may be a good time. The faint hearted can't take the weather, so the rink shouldn't be too crowded.

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

KZF Design Inc., an architecture, engineering, interior design and planning firm, announced in a press release that they will be renovating a 36,000-square-foot space in two connected structures located at 700 Broadway, at the junction of Seventh and Eighth streets. According to KZF this will be a 6 million dollar project that will comply with LEED-Silver certification. A target date for completion of the project is the Summer of 2009.

Currently KZF is located in the Baldwin Building in Walnut Hills.

There is no news for increasing jobs at KZF, but this demonstrates their stability and their investment in the future of Downtown Cincinnati. Their press release does indicate that they will have 30% more space than their current space in the Baldwin Building, so expansion would not be hampered by a lack of space.

Saturday, November 29, 2008

By now, we all know the story: the County faces a $31 million shortfall in 2009. The Board of Commissioners has determined, apparently, that the only way to fix this is to cut spending. But that seems to be looking at problem from only one of two possible angles. Why aren't we having a discussion about increasing revenue?

There are two ways to generate a significant amount of revenue for the County's general fund. First, the Board could raise the sales tax. Popular? No, of course not. But perhaps better than laying off hundreds of our neighbors. Second, the board could eliminate the "property tax rebate."

What is the property tax rebate? It's a commitment made to voters in 1996 that if a sales tax increase to build the new stadia were approved, 30% of the funds from the increase would be returned in the form of a property tax rebate. Commissioner Pepper has made it clear that we're not allowed even to discuss the rollback of the rebate. But other than to point out that the promise was made, he doesn't really say why. Presently, we redistribute about $19 million in sales tax revenue to property owners.

Let's look at the promise. It was made over 12 years ago. Bill Clinton was President. The economy was great. Local governments had tons of money to spend. No one on the Board then remains on the Board now (in fact, at least one was voted off because of the stadium deal). Many residents of HamCo now weren't residents then (like me). Many who were residents then have moved away. How long does a promise (one that was not written into the referendum and with no legal backing behind it) bind a county? All the way to fiscal insolvency?

We are no longer in a position to redistribute wealth through the "property tax rebate." It's time to seriously think through these issues, even if the solutions are politically unpopular in the short term.

What's the right answer?

A. Slash $31 million from the budget, closing Queensgate (leaving the Sheriff, rather than our judges, to decide which accused individuals remain in jail pending trial) and laying off hundreds of our friends, relatives, and neighbors?

B. Raise the sales tax rate?

C. Roll back the property tax rebate?

D. Secede from the Union. Start printing money like it's Mardi Gras!

I'm curious as to whether I'm the only person who thinks it's insane for our local leaders to bind themselves to a commitment made nearly a decade-and-a-half ago.

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Cincinnatians love underdogs. (And hot dogs. But that's another post.) Our favorite historical Reds and Bengals teams are teams that overachieved. Neither UC nor Xavier spend nearly as much on their athletics departments as do bigger schools, and that's why we get so excited when they're able to compete with the Big Dogs.

Our love of the underdog is another reason to support the Freestore Foodbank this season. I'm not sure if you've given this much thought, but when the Foodbank predicts "record need," it's not because the stereotypical homeless person is going back for seconds. It's because record numbers of people--the real underdogs of life, if only temporarily--need help.

Some of the people who need help this year are probably in your neighborhood. They're the couple with kids who was struggling to just get by, but is now in dire straits since one of the parents lost his or her job. It's the single mom or dad who lost one of his two or three part-time jobs. It's the senior citizen down the street who's desperately trying to avoid having to make a choice between buying groceries and filling prescriptions. Most of these people aren't chronically poor or low-income, but are caught in the harsh vice of these tough economic times. They'll go--reluctantly--to the Foodbank to get through the next few months, and then get back on their feet. These same folks, a year or two from now, will be generous donors to the Foodbank once they're able.

Your love of the underdog should also inspire you to help the Cincinnati Blog in its efforts to do well in the Battle of the Blogs. Hard to believe, given this stature Griff earned for this blog, but we really are the underdogs. Look at our competition, most of which has oodles of donors at its disposal: The Dean requires registration to comment on his ramblings, so he's got the email addresses of everyone who's ever commented at the Beacon, and he's using them. Alex Triantafilou, in addition to being of counsel to one of Cincinnati's largest firms, has the HamCo GOP email list at his disposal--and he's purportedly using it. David Pepper (besides receiving all those royalties from the sale of Dr Pepper*) is an associate at one of America's fifty largest law firms. And now we're in the hole--someone just added $5,000 to Pepper's tally! (Great work, Commissioner!!!) Here at the Cincinnati blog, we don't require registration for comments and we're decidedly middle class.

So click on this link to help two groups of underdogs: people who really, really need and deserve your help this season, and we humble Cincinnati bloggers.

And let me add this to my fellow lawyers: if you're at a firm where you're getting a bonus this year, you need to spend some of that money to reduce your tax liability. What's better than a charitable contribution to the Freestore Foodbank? If you're a solo practitioner or a small-firm attorney who's settling a case or collecting fees in these final six weeks of the year, same thing--got to burn some of that cash, or you're gonna get hosed on April 15th. So get yourself a deduction: you know you want to. (Check with your accountant, of course. I'm not a tax lawyer and don't pretend to be one.)

Monday, November 24, 2008

The Hamilton County Board of Elections has finally finished the official vote count. In the race for Recorder, the Election Day tally had Republican incumbent Rebecca Groppe ahead by about 3,000 votes. But no media outlet ever officially called the race, as over 20,000 ballots (provisionals and last minute absentees) were yet to be counted. That meant that Democratic challenger Wayne Coates was very much still in the race.

Tonight, we know the outcome: Wayne Coates has been elected County Recorder, winning 50.34% of the votes cast in that race (a margin of about 2,500 votes). The Clerk's race also tightened, with Republican Patricia Clancy winning with 50.51% of the votes over Democrat Martha Good (a margin of 3,800 votes). I don't know enough election law to know whether either of these results triggers recounts, or the ability of candidates to request such recounts.

By all accounts, Ms. Groppe served the residents of this County faithfully while in office, and we wish her well. Wayne Coates brings a great deal of experience as a public servant to the post, and will no doubt bring fresh ideas. He'll need to, given the County's budget troubles. Coates is currently bailiff to HamCo Municipal Court Judge Ted Berry.

While we're on the topic: let's give the HamCo Board of Elections a round of applause for running a fairly problem-free election. Other than some confusion early on Election Day regarding the ID requirement (some poll workers thought a valid driver's had to have an address that matched the poll book--that's not true, and the BoE spent over an hour on this point alone in training, and then called all the polling places once it became evident that some folks still didn't get it), we had a really clean, error-free election.

Time to gear up for City Council 2009. Anyone want to declare his or her candidacy in the comments?

Last night's Cincinnati Entertainment awards were one of funnest events I've ever attended in Cincinnati. As an avid local music fan it was invigorating to weave around a mob of Cincinnati's best musicians to get to the Por-O-Lets. The pre-show had a totally fun and dare I say really fucking cool vibe. I mean the Fairmont Girls doing live fashion commentary (the Trashies) that was beamed to the big screen inside the theater, you can't beat that. They added a charm that was part Cincy Charm, part New York snark, part Hollywood, part out right friendliness. They were having fun and treating the people coming inside as both real people and as something this city needs to understand better: as cool.

The performances were great. Bootsy's band rocked and the James Brown emulator did this move I almost can't describe. He went to a head stand, legs straight up in the air, and using his arms slid across stage ON HIS HEAD in what I could best describe as an upside-down moonwalk. The audience gasped in glee when he did that. I admit, I gasped in glee mostly, but I wasn't the only one!!

The local bands were exceptionally good: Sundresses (I final got to see them live!), Eclipse, and the Seedy Seeds. All three won an award by the way.

The show ended with Ralph Stanley. When he did O' Death there wasn't a sound other than his voice audible in the entire Emery Theater. Even the people at the bars in the back went quiet. I don't know of a more haunting and thrilling sound I've heard in a very long time. Ralph is getting old and it showed, but the crowd really had fun. People really did Banjo. I can't explain why, but they just do. I think Steve Martin did a bit on the Banjo. You just can't do much that is depress on the Banjo, it is either happy or a pickin' fire.

Also, great job by the video team. With the combination of the pre-show and the affects during the show, it was really classy, in an MTV Video Music Awards type of way circa 1994.

The pizza at the after-party at the Know Theatre from Dewey's really hit the spot. I didn't make it upstairs for the Trashies, so I don't know who won, although the lead singer for the Lions Rampant pulled up next to me at the bar with a small toy doll, so I think he might have one a runner-up prize. He is definitely going for the Kurt Cobain strain of rock-persona/style

Sunday, November 23, 2008

A few months ago, I decided I was grown up enough to discard my Xbox. (I'll admit, I considered, for more than a brief time, upgrading to Xbox 360.) It wasn't an easy decision, as I credit beer video games for the retention of my sanity during law school. But I thought that giving up the last vestiges of adolescence was the right thing to do, even if it took until my mid-30's to do it.

And then last night, I saw the ad for Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe. Are you kidding me? I can have Scorpion fight Superman? Raiden against Batman?

Dude.

I. Need. This. Game. (And, of course, a system to play it on.)

If you see an overweight thirty-something-year-old on Santa's lap when you're out doing your holiday shopping this year, please stop by and say hello. (And call the paramedics for poor old Saint Nick.)

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Everything's coming up oranges. (Except the winner of next week's game.)

O Cincinnati, magic nameI proudly to the world proclaimNo sweeter word e'er charmed my earNone to my heart was e'er so dear;A fountain of eternal youth,A tower of strength, a rock of truth.Varsity, dear VarsityThy loyal children we will be.Thy loyal, loyal children we will be!Coach Kelly has got to teach his guys (and our fans!) how to finish games, but another great win for the program!

At least one Cincinnati team has a shot at playing in January! (And if you watched ESPN-2's coverage, you learned that Bootsy Collins has apparently jumped on the Bearcats bandwagon. I just hope he doesn't write them a song that we have to listen to....)

I was honored when Griff first agreed to let me blog here. By then, for some time, the Cincinnati Blog had been--well, the Cincinnati blog. And the chance to join up with Jack (who I already knew of) and Julie (who's become one heck of a blogger) was too good an opportunity to pass up.

This week, though, my honor has turned to pride. I'm proud to be part of this blog in particular, and the Cincinnati blogosphere in general. What started out as just a simple post hoping to raise money for the Freestore Foodbank has (with no small amount of help from the Beacon) swept across the blogosphere like a California wildfire.

The Bearman is contributing based on blogs that link to his archives. Kate the Great has a terrific post on why you should give. Julie, who just became an affiliate to Greater Cincinnati Independents (a coalition of local restaurants) is donating her referral fees to the Freestore through the end of the year. Local politicians have gotten into the Battle, with HamCo Commissioner David Pepper and GOP Chair Alex Triantafilou joining the fray. The media is even starting to pay attention: see CityBeat (attempting to compete and cover the story at once) and WCPO.

The Freestore Foodbank seems excited by the competition, and has even created a way to help track the winner. The Freestore has created special url's (don't ask me how they work, I just know they do) that will tell them where their incoming hits are coming from. I've updated our links. So you can click on this link, or any other Freestore Foodbank link in the last few posts, and the Cincinnati Blog will get "credit" for the contribution in the Battle.

Too often, the blogosphere is just a consortium of echo chambers. We here at the Cincinnati Blog tend to talk to the center-left; Julie talks to food afficionados; Alex T. talks to GOP members; the Dean talks to the hopelessly confused; you get the picture. The Battle of the Blogs showcases the real power of the internet in the twenty-first century: the power to pull people together from across political, economic, and demographic boundaries to work for a common cause.

It's kind of humbling to be a part of.

And...if you need one more, selfish reason to donate to the Freestore: charitable donations are a great way to reduce your 2008 tax liability.

Local bloggers who haven't posted yet: I'm gonna call more of you out on Monday. (5chw4r7z, where are you?)

I don't think this is the first time a pack of wild Santas have descended on Cincinnati, but if you are looking an interesting day,, keep December 13th open and get yourself a Santa suit. The only think missing from the site is reference to Mrs. Claus. Frankly, women dressed as Santa are not appealing, unless, they alter the suit. Mrs. Claus, however, can be, shall we say, wow! if done right. I'm not making fashion pronouncements here, just thinking out loud. Maybe dreaming a little.

This is a great effort by the team over at Buycincy.com. If you see the guys out and about, give them a pat on the back for doing a true service to their community. Cincinnati needs small businesses and the easiest way an individual can help out the small businesses of Cincinnati is by giving them your patronage!

I plan on shopping at some of the stores in the Gateway Quarter (Metronation, Park+Vine, etc) so join me there or hit Shake It! Records in Northside.

Friday, November 21, 2008

For the first time ever, the Cincinnati Entertainment Awards have sold out. Awesome news for Music fans. Glad to know there is strong support for local music!!! There is still an option to get the Ralph Stanley only tickets, but you may not get them, check out the link about for your possible chance!

If you can't make it out, be sure to still support the effort to bring the Emery back to its glory! More Here.

I'm really happy to say that localbloggers have picked up the gauntlet, and are flinging it back in our faces!!!

So again, here's the link to the Freestore's virtual food drive. The Dean came up with a simple way for bloggers to tally their results. If you give in response to the Cincinnati Blog's imnpassioned pleas, then please either note your donation in the comments (feel free to be anonymous) or email us (you can email either the blog or me) and we'll post your donation (anonymously, if you wish).

This is going to be a tough, tough year for a lot of people. Folks are losing their jobs, both in the private and public sectors. If you're in a position to give, there's never been a better time to do so. And with the virtual food drive, it's never been easier. For about twenty bucks, you can buy a family of four a meal.

And besides, there's no way Griff can permit the Dean of Cincinnati to win this contest!

The Dean is already starting to call out local bloggers who haven't joined the cause; I guess I'll do the same. Kate: your greatness is on the line here!!!! Randy: there's nothing more UrbanCincy-ish than the Freestore!!!

Early this year, we had here what I thought was an excellent conversation on what Cincinnati government should look like. I suggested the City Manager is too powerful, and we need to amend the Charter to create a truly "strong mayor" form of government--one in which the mayor appoints department heads and proposes a budget.

Can anyone imagine an elected official telling his or her constituents that their choices are either (a) a new fee, or (b) reduction in police and fire services? Really, those are the only two choices? There aren't other places (apart from the City's principal responsibility to its citizens) that can be cut? I know that my world is upside down when I find myself in agreement with Chris Monzel.

But now, of course, the Kabuki dance will begin. Now that Dohoney has set forth an unpopular (untenable, frankly) budget proposal, Mayor Mallory will swoop in with a "better idea." It's all so disgustingly predictable.

It's time for a strong mayor. The Charter could be amended so the mayor's position would be altered as of the start of the next mayoral term. But it's time to start running City government as if both City leaders and City residents are grown-ups.

An aside: I love that fact that HamCo Commissioner David Pepper, while clearly busy with the nuts and bolts of trying to run a local government in the recession our Republican friends brought upon us, is thinking about what the overall structure of county government should look like. The Cuyahoga County proposal to create a Commission president (what some states would call a "county executive") with real authority is intriguing, to say the least. (It would resolve my complaints about leaving the budget to an unelected Administrator.) I'm no expert on local government structure, so I'm not sure what it takes--action by the state legislature? The County could, apparently, also adopt (through a plebiscite) a charter form of government. What if we did? Can we have charter governments (cities) within charter governments (the county)? It's the kind of thing I'm glad we have our leaders thinking about and discussing, and I hope to see more of this.

Earlier this week, I blogged on license suspensions, in response to an Enquirer piece on the topic. I suspect that most people don't realize the portion of the municipal court docket devoted to traffic offenses. (If you're curious, go to the Clerk's website and pull up any particular judge's docket for any given day. Any case that has "TRD" in the case number is a non-OVI traffic offense.)

Here's my suggestion: create an expanded "traffic diversion" program for license suspension cases. Not every defendant would be eligible: for starters, I would toss out any OVI suspension, 12-point suspension, or any case involving either an accident or failing to comply with a police officer.

But for those cases (the vast majority) still eligible, we could, if the judges and the prosecutors agreed, do the following. Tell any offender who is on his/her third or lower suspension charge in the past five years that his/her case will be reset in 45-60 days. If the driver is able to come back with a valid license and proof of insurance, then the prosecution will agree to reduce the charges to a single, non-moving violation. If not, then the matter will be set for trial, and--absent a showing of good cause--no continuances will be granted on the trial date. Once you've been through the diversion program, though, you will be ineligible for subsequent diversion for some period of time (five years, perhaps?).

Why is DUS such a problem in municipal court? Judges are reluctant (understandably) to lock people up for DUS offenses. After all, typically, the people who get caught driving under a suspension are poor and are suspended because they couldn't afford insurance. Most of the time, no one was harmed as a result of their offense. Often, courts will grant continuances in order to give someone time to "get valid," setting the case "for plea"--which means while the case is on the docket, the arresting officer isn't required to appear. Usually, if a person's record isn't bad, the prosecution will amend a DUS charge to "failure to display a valid license"--still a first-degree misdemeanor, but one that carries no points. And it's understood that judges usually won't incarcerate individuals who come back with a valid license.

The trouble with amending to an arguably lesser, but still non-moving violation is this: if the person cannot show proof of insurance from the date of the ticket (not the date of conviction), s/he gets suspended by the BMV all over again. And we're back in the cycle. Cases are set for trial not because a defendant actually intends to try the case, but because s/he wants to see if the officer will show up. But that means an officers spends anywhere from part to all of a morning sitting in a courtroom waiting for a case to be called. (And if the officer doesn't show up, the case is either continued or dismissed outright.)

An expanded diversion program could reduce drag on the courts' dockets. People with defenses (stolen identity, for instance) could still opt out and take their cases to trial. But most will want to get valid. And by reducing to a non-moving violation, two things happen: first the individual isn't subject to an FRA noncompliance suspension; and second, the court is able to recover costs. What's more, for those people who entered the program, their cases could be handled entirely in the arraignment rooms--meaning they never get to the regular docket. It'd save the time of judges, prosecutors, police officers, and public defenders.

Such a program would require a great deal of cooperation. The prosecutors (both city and county) would have to agree to it. The judges would have to agree to play hardball with cases that reached their dockets (i.e., no continuances "to get valid"--only for valid, trial related purposes, such as the unavailability of a witness). But it may be possible to work out some system where we can keep reduce the stakes to such an extent defendants will be willing to resolve them at arraignment, before a magistrate.

This proposal is just that: a proposal. There are probably problems I haven't thought of. But I hope it's a starting point for discussion.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

I've been very excites about this year Music CEAs taking place at the historic Emery Theater (Get your tickets NOW!). Efforts are underway way by the Emery Center Corporation to restore the grand theater to the greatness and huge relevance it held for most of the 20th Century. For a taste, check out this photo gallery from CityBeat showing just a little of the storied past of this great venue. Estimates are that the restoration will take at least 3 million dollars to complete. See below for a press release on the efforts.

The key element I want to find out is what do you want to see take place at a restored Emery? Give me your ideas in comments. Here are some of mine:

What else comes to mine? Post your thoughts and get your ticket to the CEAs today!

If you want to help out raising some of the money needed to make this happen, send me your contact information (email: cincyblog@aol.com) and I'll pass it along to Emery team and get your efforts moving in the right direction. If you have limited time, at least spread the word about this effort to bring more hands on culture to OTR and Downtown. This is a chance to have a world class venue be the home for great music, theatre, film and events that will augment the growing arts community in Cincinnati.

Here are the details on Saving the Emery from the ECC:

$3 Million Projected to Reopen the Emery Theatre

The board of the Emery Center Corporation (ECC) has been working on plans to reopen the Emery Theatre. After lying dormant for about a decade, this historic concert hall/auditorium will host 650 guests for the Cincinnati Entertainment Awards on Sunday evening, November 23. The ECC hopes that this event will demonstrate the potential of the hall to fill a niche in Cincinnati’s varied array of performing arts facilities and that other events will follow.

Vision

A restored Emery Theatre is envisioned as a mid-sized performance venue and an educational, community-based arts facility with world-class acoustics. The concept is to operate the Emery as a presenting hall for performances aimed at a young urban audience. The Emery can accommodate local and touring musicians, choral groups, lectures, movies and multi-media presentations, festivals, corporate meetings and conventions.

Current Activities

In January 2008, the University of Cincinnati (UC) charged the ECC to identify a viable manager and program for the Emery Theatre by the end of this year. After several years of dormancy, the ECC’s board of trustees has been meeting regularly and working intensively on this challenge. Numerous professionals and volunteers have participated in preliminary construction work and planning.

The ECC believes the revival of the Emery Theatre can be accomplished in a two-phased restoration. The first phase could open the orchestra and first balcony (1100 seats total) by the end of 2011, in time to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the hall in January 2012. The second phase could open the second balcony for a total of 1600 seats at some future date.

Projected at just $3 million, Phase I could open the Emery’s doors at relatively low cost and capitalize on this currently underutilized resource. The viability of the project is enhanced by potential income from the apartments, either through rent or condominium sales, which could yield $1 to 2 million in equity toward the theatre’s renovation.

History

Completed in 1911, the Emery Theatre/former Ohio Mechanic’s Institute-College of Applied Science (OMI-CAS) Building has a distinguished heritage, having been endowed by philanthropist Mary Emery and designed by architects Samuel Hannaford & Sons. The Emery Theatre has the highest quality acoustics and was compared to Carnegie Hall by the renowned conductor Leopold Stokowski. This nearly flawless concert hall was the home of the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra from 1912 to 1936.

Many Broadway stars and world-renowned performing artists have appeared on the Emery stage, including Russian ballet dancers Nijinsky and Anna Pavlova, actresses Bette Davis and Katherine Cornell, and composers John Philip Sousa and George Gershwin, who played his famous "Rhapsody in Blue" with the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra here shortly after premiering it at Carnegie Hall in New York.

Recent Redevelopment

The Emery Theatre/former OMI-CAS Building came under the ownership of the University of Cincinnati in 1969. When OMI-CAS moved to its new Edgecliff Campus in 1988, the building sat vacant, and the theatre was operated for a decade by the American Theatre Organ Society. The Emery Center Corporation (ECC) was created in 1988 to promote the restoration and sustainable operation of the Emery Theatre.

While restoration of the theatre was delayed, the rest of the complex was redeveloped in 1999-2001, with 59 units of market-rate housing, interior parking, and commercial office and retail space. The $9.7 million project included exterior renovation and interior stabilization of the theatre. The complex is leased long-term (40 + 40 years) to the Emery Center Apartments LP (ECALP), and the ECC holds a sublease for the theatre.

Need

Cincinnati has pent-up demand for a mid-sized theater. The Emery will have 1600 seats, as compared with 3400 in Music Hall, 2700 in the Aronoff, 2400 at the Taft, and 900 at CCM’s Corbett Auditorium. Cincinnati needs a hall for mid-sized audiences to complement our other performing venues. Cincinnatians drive to other cities in our region such as Louisville, Columbus, Indianapolis, Lexington, and Dayton to enjoy entertainers who skip Cincinnati for lack of a suitable venue for their touring shows.

The Emery is scheduled to be open to the public one night only this year. On November 23, the Cincinnati Entertainment Awards will be held in the Emery and all bar proceeds will be given to Save the Emery. Tickets are required and can be purchased at cea.citybeat.com This event is happening with a temporary certificate of occupancy. Stop in to enjoy the award show and take a look around. Then buy a drink and tip heavily! There is more work to be done.